Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 283 F.2d 252 - Morales v. Wilkinson

Morales v. Wilkinson’s Empirical Analysis

283 F.2d 252 · 1960

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
September 1992
most recently cited

5 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently September 1992

5 federal appellate ·

501960197019801990decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Lehigh Valley Railroad Company v. Royal Indemnity Company and Others · Oklahoma v. Texas · Sutton v. United States · Musey v. United States

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “If there was a formal defect in the indictment, the question was not raised before or during the trial. If constitutional requirements are not met then a verdict of guilty does not cure the defect. Nor will a verdict cure a defective indictment which fails, by any construction, to state an offense. [T]he appellant- is also precluded from relief because habeas corpus can not be invoked for relief against defective indictments unless it clearly appears that, under no' circumstances, could a valid conviction result from facts provable under the indictment.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.